Fairfield Church of Christ renovations
2008 Lakota East homecoming
2008 Ross homecoming
Home > Blogs > Sir Critic on Cinema > Archives > 2008 > May > 02 > Entry
‘Iron Man’ not quite ironclad, but still a blast
I can’t wait to see Iron Man II. I bet it will be even better than the original.
I know, I’m getting ahead of myself, but I’m more anxious to see the movie that will come out in two or three years than I am to revisit the movie that just opened.
That’s not to say the first Iron Man isn’t a lot of fun. It has some spectacular moments, powered by an Oscar quality performance by Robert Downey Jr.
Right off the bat, it’s easy to see that the brilliant engineer Tony Stark will be a different kind of hero. He’s filled with cocky bravado, which is at once arrogant and justified. When someone compares Tony to Leonardo Da Vinci, he retorts, “That’s ridiculous. I don’t paint.” No one can deny the man is a genius, even when they can’t stand him.
But not even Stark’s inflated pride can stop him from being shaken to the core when, on a mission in Afghanistan, his convoy is ambushed by terrorists who want Stark to build them a super weapon. Stark complies all right, by creating a massive mechanical suit with a heck of a weapons cache.
Still, once that ordeal passes, Stark is no longer interested in being a man of war. Haunted by how his weapons have been used against him, Stark vows to put his inventions to work for more altruistic purposes. This does not sit at all well with his longtime partner, Obadiah Stane (a bald and bearded Jeff Bridges), who wants to maintain the company’s lucrative standing.
Like many superhero origin movies, Iron Man tends to slow down sometimes because it has to set up the world of its hero. The same was true of the 1978 Superman movie, the first Spider-Man movie and the 2003 Hulk. However, Iron Man’s biggest problem isn’t pacing. It’s the lame villain.
I’m not going to explain who or what that is, because I think the movie means for it to be a “surprise,” even though any experienced viewer should be able to spot it from the first reel. The bigger problem, though, is that the bad guy is never as threatening as he should be. I rarely got the sense Tony, or the world was in any mortal danger. That makes the big climactic battle a bit of a letdown.
Such a weak villain might have ruined a lesser movie, but Downey’s triumphant performance makes that impossible. I knew Downey would pull it off, but I was still amazed at how superbly he carried this movie. Many of Downey’s roles have been marked by a playful sarcasm, but it’s never been put to better use than it has here.
Typically, the hero’s greatest character flaw subsides after he or she survives the ordeal that made him a costumed crusader, but that’s not what happens to Tony Stark. He undergoes a change of heart, to be sure, but he was full of himself before Afghanistan, and he was just as full of himself after it. That quality is at once Tony Stark’s great strength and weakness, and it makes him unique among heroes. Watch how it plays out when Tony is testing his suit to great comic effect.
Just as refreshing is Tony’s relationship with his gal Friday, Pepper Potts, played with boundless charm by Gwyneth Paltrow. Theirs isn’t the “I love him but can’t have him” relationship like Peter Parker and Mary Jane or the “If only she knew” tap dance that Clark Kent plays with Lois Lane. Instead, the two engage in a delectable he/she loves me/loves me not banter that makes their flirtation sparkle.
(Funnily enough, the first Iron Man suit looks very much like the robots that tromp through Manhattan in the severely underappreciated Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, which also starred one Gwyneth Paltrow.)
Behind the scenes, the greatest credit for Iron Man’s success must go to director Jon Favreau, who has been quietly building his strengths. He pulled off the miraculous feat of making Will Ferrell funny in Elf, and he showed how the movie Jumanji should have been made when he directed the too little seen Zathura.
In both movies, Favreau cannily used low-tech effects, and carries that approach to its pinnacle in Iron Man. There are plenty of digital effects, to be sure, but they’re augmented by the mechanical creations of Stan Winston’s studio. The mixed approach makes most of the action scenes play beautifully
Am I disappointed that Iron Man wasn’t a home run? Not really. The first Spider-Man, in retrospect, plays like a very entertaining set up for an even greater movie to follow. I have every confidence that from here on out, Iron Man will only fly higher.
GRADE: B+
Seen it already? Feel free to comment and tell me what you think.
Permalink | Comments (9) | Post your comment | Categories: Reviews
Comments
By rhonda
May 10, 2008 1:25 AM | Link to this
My husband and I just saw the movie and we were both very entertained! The plot was interesting, the acting very good (I even liked Bridges because he wasn’t a campy/over the top villain), and the action was top notch. Regarding taking the kids…I’m a mom of 5 & 3 year olds. My personal feeling is I wouldn’t let my kids see this until about age 10 or 11. The reason: while it’s a comic book character flick — the first half was mostly set-up, with some pretty disturbing/graphic & realistic (especially for the times we live in) flashes of terror/torture happening to Stark. I wouldn’t take the younger kids for that reason. Due to the mid-east war based themes, parents/guardians of kids of any age whose loved ones are currently deployed over there might think twice about it too.By Kim
May 6, 2008 4:50 PM | Link to this
And btw - I was thrilled with Robert Downey Jr. being cast - I love him and thought he would do a great job!By Kim
May 6, 2008 4:41 PM | Link to this
Shoot - guess I shouldn’t have read if I hadn’t seen it yet! Oh well. Apparently it is painfully obvious, because I guessed who the villan would be just reading the character list - ha! I am looking forward to seeing this one - but us freebie ticket holders can’t go on opening weekend. Maybe this weekend…By Sir Critic
May 5, 2008 1:42 PM | Link to this
Good questions, RAJ. Part of the problem has to do with miscasting. Jeff Bridges is a great actor, except when he’s playing villainous types. He just doesn’t cut a very menacing figure, bald cap or not. An attempt to play a killer in “The Vanishing” was embarrassing. Another problem was the movie seemed to be making Bridges’ treachery a “surprise,” when it was obvious from the word go. The one good move that character made was stealing the “pacemaker,” because that was the one truly scary thing he did. That’s the key - villains should inspire some degree of fear or pose a serious threat. Bridges didn’t do enough of either.By RAJ
May 5, 2008 1:15 PM | Link to this
So if Bridges’ villain was weak, what makes a villain strong? I thought he played the role perfectly and realistically. Should he have been more over-the-top and cartoony? And wasn’t Tony in great danger after losing his helmet and gauntlet during the final battle? Anyway, solid review of a solid movie. Here’s hoping the sequel will be stronger.By Socialwrkr
May 4, 2008 12:40 AM | Link to this
I went to see Iron Man today with a 9 year old boy. On leaving the theater, his reaction was “that was awesome!”. I loved it too and can’t wait for the next one. While I agree the villian wasn’t very strong, it wasn’t so important here where all the context was being laid for future films. Lots of great acting, I’m so impressed with Robert Downey Jr. Great movie!By Allie D.
May 2, 2008 6:45 PM | Link to this
Well, it looks like we shared much the same sentiments in our reviews, Eric! I agree completely with Bridges… I thought he was a very weak villain. But overall, I had an absolute blast at this movie and look forward to the sequel as well!By Sir Critic
May 2, 2008 1:34 PM | Link to this
JT: If your kids got through Spidey and Captain Jack OK, they should be just fine with “Iron Man.” There are a few fairly tense scenes, but, in my opinion, nothing traumatizing. Thanks for your query.By JT
May 2, 2008 12:06 PM | Link to this
Mr. Sir Critic, sir, one question: Is Iron Man suitable for children 7 and 9. They’ve both seen all of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies and Spider Man movies. Please advise. Thank you